You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to users@archiva.apache.org by Sergey Nikitin <ni...@gmail.com> on 2009/07/21 17:55:49 UTC
Archiva performance question
Hi,
I've started with Archiva evaluation and noticed that build time for project
is increased by ~40-50% in case Archiva is used instead of simple remote
repositories specification.
I am building my test project on "machine A", Archiva is installed on
"machine B". Both machines are in a very fast network.
Typical maven behaviour is:
"Downloading: ..."
hang for 2-3 seconds
"... downloaded"
File size don't matter that much - POM file and 6Mb jar got almost same
download time from Archiva.
Internet connection is very fast for both machines.
Are there some things to take a look on? Or it is inevitable performance
drop due to all the things Archiva does behind the curtain?
Sergey
--
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Archiva-performance-question-tp24590470p24590470.html
Sent from the archiva-users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Re: Re : Archiva performance question
Posted by Sergey Nikitin <ni...@gmail.com>.
Hello,
Yesterday i've tried Archiva with Oracle and Hsqldb as artefacts database.
Oracle was not working for me due to problems with varchar2 size (Archiva
tries to make a column with varchar2(4000+), which is not possible). Few
workarounds haven't worked, so i just left it without digging deep.
Hsqldb is ok, but performance win was about 5%.
Im still looking forward to any information concerning my initial question
Sergey
Julien HENRY wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> In my company some users are reporting the same issue: they prefer to use
> direct repository access instead of our internal Archiva because of
> performance drop.
>
> I plan to use an external DB instead of embedded Derby to see if it
> improves performances, but I'm very interested to know if there is
> something else I can do.
>
> Regards,
>
> Julien
>
>
--
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Archiva-performance-question-tp24590470p24640851.html
Sent from the archiva-users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Re : Archiva performance question
Posted by Julien HENRY <he...@yahoo.fr>.
Hi,
In my company some users are reporting the same issue: they prefer to use direct repository access instead of our internal Archiva because of performance drop.
I plan to use an external DB instead of embedded Derby to see if it improves performances, but I'm very interested to know if there is something else I can do.
Regards,
Julien
________________________________
De : Sergey Nikitin <ni...@gmail.com>
À : users@archiva.apache.org
Envoyé le : Mardi, 21 Juillet 2009, 17h55mn 49s
Objet : Archiva performance question
Hi,
I've started with Archiva evaluation and noticed that build time for project
is increased by ~40-50% in case Archiva is used instead of simple remote
repositories specification.
I am building my test project on "machine A", Archiva is installed on
"machine B". Both machines are in a very fast network.
Typical maven behaviour is:
"Downloading: ..."
hang for 2-3 seconds
"... downloaded"
File size don't matter that much - POM file and 6Mb jar got almost same
download time from Archiva.
Internet connection is very fast for both machines.
Are there some things to take a look on? Or it is inevitable performance
drop due to all the things Archiva does behind the curtain?
Sergey
--
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Archiva-performance-question-tp24590470p24590470.html
Sent from the archiva-users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.